Harry Potter And The Goblet of Fire by J.K. Rowling has to be one of my favorite books in the Harry Potter series. If you don't know, Harry Potter is a young wizard who is famous for defeating the most evil wizard of all time. This evil wizard is named Voldemort, and as he slowly regains power, he is after revenge. Voldemort in this book is finally about to regain power completely, and his followers called Death Eaters are returning to him. Harry has two best friends, Hermione and Ron. In this book Harry is entered into a dangerous competition in which the person that entered him hopes he will die. This person ends up being one of Voldemorts followers. But as Harry struggles to survive, I noticed that there are other things going on in the text that are more complex than they seem. These things generally represent racism and equality.
One example of this is when Hermione starts a campaign for Elf rights. In the book, there are creatures called House Elves and they serve as slaves to wizard families. I found that these elves may represent those who are discriminated against in our world such as African Americans in the United States of America or Jews in Europe during World War II. Another thing to prove this is that the wizards are actually against the elves having equal rights much like Americans after the Civil War. For example on page 114 it says, "Even as Hermione began to plead with him, Hagrid still refused to sign up for S.P.E.W." Hagrid is a good friend of Harry's and he is fascinated by magical creatures such as House Elves, but the fact that he wouldn't help them to obtain equal rights still shows that he is infact racist against these creatures whether they fascinate him or not. And by showing this, you can now see how she represented the controversy that the issues of slavery and equal rights had.
Another thing that really reveals a hidden message about racism is the antagonists. Voldemort's original goal was to rid the world of all people who aren't of pure magical descent. Before Harry defeated him, Voldemort led his Death Eaters on campaigns in which he terrorized Muggles ( regular people who aren't magic), Mudbloods ( those who are magic but have non-magic parents), and anyone who got in there way. Young readers don't really have to wonder why he did this, because all they have to know is that he was evil. But if you look deeper, the real reason that Voldemort treated these people this way was because he was racist! And if you look even further, Voldemort is a lot like Adolf Hitler, and the Death Eaters are a lot like the Nazis or the Ku Klux Klan. And since J.K. Rowling portrayed these people as the bad guys, you can clearly see that her view on racism was that it was bad. So a hidden message that I found is that racism is wrong and unjust.
So despite the amazing stories that the Harry Potter books contain, there are also hidden messages about our world within the pages that are represented by symbolism and just the way she describes these symbols that eventually gave way to show that she was against racism. But a person wouldn't read these books once and say that the stories are about racism. Infact, they may not even notice that there was anything about this issue. And that is why when you can look closer at the text, you can find these hidden themes. I think it is amazing that J.K. Rowling could create such an amazing story and still include such a meaningful and interesting message, hidden within those hundreds of pages.
Thursday, November 14, 2013
Sunday, November 3, 2013
Argumentive Essay
Our books are under attack. The same books that we enjoy to read in our free time whenever we have the chance are now going to be limited. We may never be able to read our favorite books again. A few years ago, a debate rose about whether or not young adult books that include gruesome, graphic, or dark issues and images should be under limited access to young adults and teenagers. Popular books like The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins and Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling have been challenged. The argument of those who criticize these books is that these books are too dark and are bad for kids and young adults alike. But the truth is, access to young adult books with gruesome or dark content should be unlimited because teens and young adults can get valuable lessons and experience from these books.
One way teens can get valuable experiences and lessons from YA books with dark and gruesome content is that they can connect the experiences of the characters in these books to that of their own lives and make changes based on the outcome of these issues in the books. For example, teens can learn what to do or not to do based on their insight in the book of any problems they are facing. An example of this is if a boy that wants to run away reads about another teen who ran away, reading the outcome of this other teens journey may give the real boy a glimpse into the future about the consequences of their actions. So what I am saying is, since teens can see possible consequences of something that they may have thought of doing, they may change their mind about these actions and find a different way to solve their problems rather than the bad ways described in these books. Another example of how if a teen relates to a character it will help them is if they relate to a character in a YA books who has the same problems as them, they may feel better about the problems that they are experiencing in their lives. For example, according to Meghan Cox Gurdon's article called "Darkness Too Visible", "If a teen has been abused, the logic follows, reading about another teen in the same straits will be comforting". This means that teens will learn the valuable lesson that they are not alone in their problems that they are facing in their lives. For example according to Why the Best Kids Books Are Witten in Blood by Sherman Alexie (who is also the author of the book, The Absolutely True Diary of A Part-Time Indian which has been frequently challenged), "I write to give them weapons- in the form of words and ideas that will help them fight their monsters". The monsters that Sherman Alexie is discussing are the problems that the teens are facing in their lives.
Another example of why access to YA books with gruesome or dark content is that teens who haven't experienced the issues described in these books can learn about them and prepare themselves should they occur in their lives. It really is the truth when I say that parents cant protect their kids forever because eventually kids and teens alike will have to learn about these issues in order to understand the world around them. For example going back to the quote I got from Sherman Alexie in my previous paragraph, these books can be used as "weapons", but not just for those who are currently facing these problems, but also for teens who have not experienced these problems, but may experience them in the future.
But despite the valuable lessons and experience that readers can take from these books, there are still many people who believe that access to YA books should be limited. One of those people is Meghan Cox Gurdon who wrote the article "Darkness Too Visible". One of her reasons for why she thinks that access to YA books should be limited is explained when she says, "Yet it is also possible-indeed, likely- that books focusing on pathologies help normalize and, in the case of self-harm, may even spread their plausibility and likelihood to young people who might otherwise never have imagined such extreme measures". This means that young adults may think that what characters do is plausible and may even do these things. But what Gurdon and other critics of YA fiction don't realize is that if teens were to continue reading these books, they would soon learn the consequences of these "extreme measures" by reading their outcome in the book and this will down-right wipe out their "plausibility and likelihood". These critics also don't realize that the more gruesome and graphic a book is, the more likely it's message and or warning is to get across affectively to those who read it. And this will help teach readers, including teens, right from wrong in the issues described in YA fiction.
So overall, it is clear that access to YA novels and books that may include disagreeable content that may arouse criticism, should still not be taken away from teens who, despite these dark and intense qualities, enjoy reading these books and learn valuable lessons along the way that they can use to help them throughout the rest of their lives. And despite criticism saying that these books may spread bad ideas into the minds of young readers, the truth is that these books do exactly the opposite by showing the flaws and bad outcomes of these bad ideas. We can't just let teens and kids go on without truly understanding the world around them, and that means that we need to keep access to YA fiction open, and free.
One way teens can get valuable experiences and lessons from YA books with dark and gruesome content is that they can connect the experiences of the characters in these books to that of their own lives and make changes based on the outcome of these issues in the books. For example, teens can learn what to do or not to do based on their insight in the book of any problems they are facing. An example of this is if a boy that wants to run away reads about another teen who ran away, reading the outcome of this other teens journey may give the real boy a glimpse into the future about the consequences of their actions. So what I am saying is, since teens can see possible consequences of something that they may have thought of doing, they may change their mind about these actions and find a different way to solve their problems rather than the bad ways described in these books. Another example of how if a teen relates to a character it will help them is if they relate to a character in a YA books who has the same problems as them, they may feel better about the problems that they are experiencing in their lives. For example, according to Meghan Cox Gurdon's article called "Darkness Too Visible", "If a teen has been abused, the logic follows, reading about another teen in the same straits will be comforting". This means that teens will learn the valuable lesson that they are not alone in their problems that they are facing in their lives. For example according to Why the Best Kids Books Are Witten in Blood by Sherman Alexie (who is also the author of the book, The Absolutely True Diary of A Part-Time Indian which has been frequently challenged), "I write to give them weapons- in the form of words and ideas that will help them fight their monsters". The monsters that Sherman Alexie is discussing are the problems that the teens are facing in their lives.
Another example of why access to YA books with gruesome or dark content is that teens who haven't experienced the issues described in these books can learn about them and prepare themselves should they occur in their lives. It really is the truth when I say that parents cant protect their kids forever because eventually kids and teens alike will have to learn about these issues in order to understand the world around them. For example going back to the quote I got from Sherman Alexie in my previous paragraph, these books can be used as "weapons", but not just for those who are currently facing these problems, but also for teens who have not experienced these problems, but may experience them in the future.
But despite the valuable lessons and experience that readers can take from these books, there are still many people who believe that access to YA books should be limited. One of those people is Meghan Cox Gurdon who wrote the article "Darkness Too Visible". One of her reasons for why she thinks that access to YA books should be limited is explained when she says, "Yet it is also possible-indeed, likely- that books focusing on pathologies help normalize and, in the case of self-harm, may even spread their plausibility and likelihood to young people who might otherwise never have imagined such extreme measures". This means that young adults may think that what characters do is plausible and may even do these things. But what Gurdon and other critics of YA fiction don't realize is that if teens were to continue reading these books, they would soon learn the consequences of these "extreme measures" by reading their outcome in the book and this will down-right wipe out their "plausibility and likelihood". These critics also don't realize that the more gruesome and graphic a book is, the more likely it's message and or warning is to get across affectively to those who read it. And this will help teach readers, including teens, right from wrong in the issues described in YA fiction.
So overall, it is clear that access to YA novels and books that may include disagreeable content that may arouse criticism, should still not be taken away from teens who, despite these dark and intense qualities, enjoy reading these books and learn valuable lessons along the way that they can use to help them throughout the rest of their lives. And despite criticism saying that these books may spread bad ideas into the minds of young readers, the truth is that these books do exactly the opposite by showing the flaws and bad outcomes of these bad ideas. We can't just let teens and kids go on without truly understanding the world around them, and that means that we need to keep access to YA fiction open, and free.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Critical Analysis of Witch-Hunt: Mysteries of the Salem Witch Trials
In the book Witch-Hunt: Mysteries of the Salem Witch Trials by Marc Aronson, Aronson writes a detailed description of the Salem witch trials as well as things that aren't clear about this strange time in Colonial America. Anderson begins with describing the Carrier trial and how the whole thing began. He begins much like a screenplay with just the people in the room's perspectives on what is going on. For example, in the first sentence of the book: "Judge: Abigail Williams, who hurts you?", it is just the people speaking and there is no interaction by the author at all. But throughout the rest of the book, Aronson adds his own personal perspective on the matters but stays away from any obvious bias. Although that it is true that he generally stays away from bias, sometimes the quotes that he chooses speak his opinion through them for example when he quotes Cotton Mather saying that "the devil can take many shapes and forms" and then later in the book when he quotes Mather now saying "The devil cannot take place of a person that is innocent before God", he is basically showing how he knows that the accusers and their supporters were wrong by having quotes that show their mistakes, in this case it is Cotton Mather contradicting himself. Another powerful tool that Aronson uses in order to deliver almost bias-less information is his use of perspective. His general perspective keeps switching so that at first we believe that person is a witch but as soon as we hear the other person's perspective, we aren't sure what to think. He allows us to form our own opinions by using logic without telling us what is right and wrong. But sometimes the reader can catch him saying some opinionated explanations of the situation. for example on page 142 he says in a response to an accusation of Mercy Lewis , "this is obviously just a scared girl trying to get over her peers". This can be seen as just a regular interpretation of the accusation but I think that it is Aronson trying to show how ridiculous the accusations were. Finally, Aronson summarizes the entire trials and where he got the information. He next comments on many other books and stories about the Salem witch trials including the famous works of the Viking Press "The Crucible". He explains how his information is the same and different from all of these pieces and states once and for all that "The Salem witch trials will forever remain a mystery".
I learned so much about the Salem witch trials from this book than I could have ever known had I not read it. Before I read this, the only information I knew about the trials was from visiting Salem and from "The Crucible" that Aronson proved to be inaccurate. My opinion that the people hanged were not witches is now stronger than ever now that I know pretty much the entire story of the Salem witch trials. But some questions still remain in order to have a solid conclusion about the trials. Why did the girls accuse their neighbors and relatives? Why did the judges use spectral evidence as enough to sentence someone to death? How did the trials begin in the first place. And why?
I learned so much about the Salem witch trials from this book than I could have ever known had I not read it. Before I read this, the only information I knew about the trials was from visiting Salem and from "The Crucible" that Aronson proved to be inaccurate. My opinion that the people hanged were not witches is now stronger than ever now that I know pretty much the entire story of the Salem witch trials. But some questions still remain in order to have a solid conclusion about the trials. Why did the girls accuse their neighbors and relatives? Why did the judges use spectral evidence as enough to sentence someone to death? How did the trials begin in the first place. And why?
Thursday, October 17, 2013
Why the Best Kid Books Are Written in Blood by Sherman Alexie
"Why the Best Kids Books Are Written in Blood" by Sherman Alexie tells readers about how censoring YA books will do more harm than good because many teens have already encountered these issues in their loves. And another thing that this article tells readers about is that YA fiction can have positive effects on teens because they can gain valuable experience that can be used as a "weapon" against these dark things in their lives. Alexie includes many quotes and perspectives of both critics of YA fiction, and teens who actually enjoy these books. He also includes many personal connections between himself and teens. For example he said, "When I think of the poverty-stricken, sexually and physically abused, self-loathing Native American teenager I was, I can only wish, immodestly that I'd been given the opportunity to read "The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian"". He is connecting himself to teens in real life with these problems who may read YA books. He also constantly criticizes Meghan Cox Gurdon, a critic of YA fiction, whenever quotes her, and always has a response ready for all of her arguments.
Throughout the entire text, Alexie tries to convince the readers that the criticisms of YA fiction are incorrect and that teens don't need protecting from these problems, they need tools or weapons to help solve these problems, and also that a YA book is an example of one of these tools because teens can learn from it. Through the whole passage, Alexie makes us feel bad for the teens who have been victims of the same issues in YA fiction, so that we will be on their side. But when he quotes Meghan Cox Gurdon, he makes it seem as if she is ignorant and that she doesn't understand the teens problems and point of view. This may be because in Ms.Gurdon's article, the teen perspective was absent from the entire passage. An example of how Alexie makes it seem like Gurdon is ignorant is when he said, "Does Gurdon honestly believe that a sexually explicit YA novel will traumatize a teen mother?" He also goes on to name more examples of how the issues in YA books will not bother teens that have already encountered these things in real life. The way he words these rhetorical questions makes it so that Gurdon can't really respond to defend herself. And Alexie also goes on to attack Gurdon's views on who should be the "gatekeepers". He quotes librarians in order to get across the point that they as well as writers are not responsible for the censorship of these books, and those who are actually responsible are the parents. By using these quotes, he is able to freeze her blame of writers and librarians for not helping to make sure kids don't read books that are too explicit for them. Overall, Alexies use of quotes make his arguments stronger because in a sense it is not just him arguing, but a group of the people he quoted behind him as well.
Overall, I agree with Sherman Alexie's ideas which include, that teens don't need protection from things that they either have already experienced or may experience in their future because they have to learn about these things someday, and what they really need is tools or weapons to use to fight these things. I also agree with him when he says Gurdon is incorrect about some of her views, but I don't think she is completely stupid, but I just don't agree with her opinion. Also on the subject of "gatekeepers" I sort of think that teens should sometimes serve as their own gatekeepers because teens know what they can and can't take in a book, and if they begin to not like the book they can stop reading it. "Why the Best Kid Books Are Written in Blood" by Sherman Alexie is a great article that clearly conveys it's opinion and makes it sort of hard to disagree with it. My opinion that teens should be able to read whatever they want is still the same, but now I too have the opinion that YA books can have positive effects on teens. And I still haven't been convinced that these books can't have negative effects on teens, but right now because of this article, I still feel that these books have more positive effects than negative ones.
Throughout the entire text, Alexie tries to convince the readers that the criticisms of YA fiction are incorrect and that teens don't need protecting from these problems, they need tools or weapons to help solve these problems, and also that a YA book is an example of one of these tools because teens can learn from it. Through the whole passage, Alexie makes us feel bad for the teens who have been victims of the same issues in YA fiction, so that we will be on their side. But when he quotes Meghan Cox Gurdon, he makes it seem as if she is ignorant and that she doesn't understand the teens problems and point of view. This may be because in Ms.Gurdon's article, the teen perspective was absent from the entire passage. An example of how Alexie makes it seem like Gurdon is ignorant is when he said, "Does Gurdon honestly believe that a sexually explicit YA novel will traumatize a teen mother?" He also goes on to name more examples of how the issues in YA books will not bother teens that have already encountered these things in real life. The way he words these rhetorical questions makes it so that Gurdon can't really respond to defend herself. And Alexie also goes on to attack Gurdon's views on who should be the "gatekeepers". He quotes librarians in order to get across the point that they as well as writers are not responsible for the censorship of these books, and those who are actually responsible are the parents. By using these quotes, he is able to freeze her blame of writers and librarians for not helping to make sure kids don't read books that are too explicit for them. Overall, Alexies use of quotes make his arguments stronger because in a sense it is not just him arguing, but a group of the people he quoted behind him as well.
Overall, I agree with Sherman Alexie's ideas which include, that teens don't need protection from things that they either have already experienced or may experience in their future because they have to learn about these things someday, and what they really need is tools or weapons to use to fight these things. I also agree with him when he says Gurdon is incorrect about some of her views, but I don't think she is completely stupid, but I just don't agree with her opinion. Also on the subject of "gatekeepers" I sort of think that teens should sometimes serve as their own gatekeepers because teens know what they can and can't take in a book, and if they begin to not like the book they can stop reading it. "Why the Best Kid Books Are Written in Blood" by Sherman Alexie is a great article that clearly conveys it's opinion and makes it sort of hard to disagree with it. My opinion that teens should be able to read whatever they want is still the same, but now I too have the opinion that YA books can have positive effects on teens. And I still haven't been convinced that these books can't have negative effects on teens, but right now because of this article, I still feel that these books have more positive effects than negative ones.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Faithful Elephants byYukio Tsuchiya
In class, we read the passage "Faithful Elephants: A True Story of Animals, People, and War" by Yukio Tsuchiya. It was a touching and tragic story that was about how three elephants in a zoo in Tokyo had to be put to death because of the war that Japan was in. Because poisoning and injecting didn't work, the only option was to starve the elephants to death. I believe that symbolism plays a large role in this story by helping the reader find the authors purpose and hidden messages within the text.
A huge example of symbols in the book are the elephants themselves. I think that the elephants symbolize all of the innocent people that were affected by the war but they didn't do anything wrong. The elephants had done nothing wrong and they were so innocent that they couldn't understand why they were not being fed. Another symbol that involves the elephants is their bonsai trick. The elephants did this because people liked it so when the elephants stopped getting food, they assumed that all they had to do was their bonsai trick and they would get food. The text said "surely their friend would reward them with food and water as he used to do". This quote shows again hoe innocent the elephants were because they thought that the bonsai trick would help. I believe that the bonsai trick might represent the innocent people's efforts to end the war.
Another example of symbolism in the story is when the author described the dropping bombs as rain. He said, "Bombs were dropped on Tokyo day and night like falling rain. I think that this means that the war is coming down hard and fast, just like the falling of rain. Also when it is raining it is usually dark and gray outside so this could also represent how gloomy it was because of the war.
Another example of a symbol in the story is the cherry blossoms. I think that this symbol is actually connected to the symbol of the bombs falling like rain because like the bombs, the cherry blossoms are falling. But instead of being described as rain-like, they are compared to snow. This symbol is mentioned twice, once at the very beginning of the passage and one at the very end. First of all, I think that the cherry blossoms might represent spring, because when they are mentioned in the beginning it may represent a rebirth of the zoo after the war because spring can represent rebirth. This is also because in this new zoo there are three new elephants to replace the old ones.
So when the cherry blossoms are compared to that of snowflakes I think it represents how the situation has calmed down, because as I said before, the rain is falling down hard but snowflakes drift softly and calmly. It could also be that the war had frozen over like a frozen over rain droplet is a snowflake. So I think these to things symbolize how the situation has changed.
Overall, "Faithful Elephants" by Yukio Tcuchiya is a tragic and wonderful tale supported by all of the symbols the author added to make the story more interesting. These symbols including the elephants, the bonsai trick, the falling bombs, and the cherry blossoms, were very well written. All these symbols helped the story be more than just words on paper, they helped "Faithful Elephants" a place in our hearts as well,.
.
A huge example of symbols in the book are the elephants themselves. I think that the elephants symbolize all of the innocent people that were affected by the war but they didn't do anything wrong. The elephants had done nothing wrong and they were so innocent that they couldn't understand why they were not being fed. Another symbol that involves the elephants is their bonsai trick. The elephants did this because people liked it so when the elephants stopped getting food, they assumed that all they had to do was their bonsai trick and they would get food. The text said "surely their friend would reward them with food and water as he used to do". This quote shows again hoe innocent the elephants were because they thought that the bonsai trick would help. I believe that the bonsai trick might represent the innocent people's efforts to end the war.
Another example of symbolism in the story is when the author described the dropping bombs as rain. He said, "Bombs were dropped on Tokyo day and night like falling rain. I think that this means that the war is coming down hard and fast, just like the falling of rain. Also when it is raining it is usually dark and gray outside so this could also represent how gloomy it was because of the war.
Another example of a symbol in the story is the cherry blossoms. I think that this symbol is actually connected to the symbol of the bombs falling like rain because like the bombs, the cherry blossoms are falling. But instead of being described as rain-like, they are compared to snow. This symbol is mentioned twice, once at the very beginning of the passage and one at the very end. First of all, I think that the cherry blossoms might represent spring, because when they are mentioned in the beginning it may represent a rebirth of the zoo after the war because spring can represent rebirth. This is also because in this new zoo there are three new elephants to replace the old ones.
So when the cherry blossoms are compared to that of snowflakes I think it represents how the situation has calmed down, because as I said before, the rain is falling down hard but snowflakes drift softly and calmly. It could also be that the war had frozen over like a frozen over rain droplet is a snowflake. So I think these to things symbolize how the situation has changed.
Overall, "Faithful Elephants" by Yukio Tcuchiya is a tragic and wonderful tale supported by all of the symbols the author added to make the story more interesting. These symbols including the elephants, the bonsai trick, the falling bombs, and the cherry blossoms, were very well written. All these symbols helped the story be more than just words on paper, they helped "Faithful Elephants" a place in our hearts as well,.
.
Thursday, September 12, 2013
Over the summer I read the book "Franklin Delanoe Roosevelt" by Russell Freedman. This book is a biography about the life, hardships, and accomplishments of Franklin .D Roosevelt; which you can most likely guess from the title. I'll be honest now. Before I read this book, I knew close to nothing about our former president. And as I learned about this man's life, I began to realize that he was indeed a great president! There are so many things about him that are really surprising. For example, he was the first cousin of our other former president Theodor Roosevelt, and what is really interesting is that these two presidents both had governing positions in New York and then they were both president. But by far the most interesting thing I learned about Franklin D. Roosevelt was how he kept doing what he loved after being stricken with the deadly disease polio that paralyzed his legs. And despite this terrible sadness, Roosevelt went on to be president for 3 terms. Within these 3 terms he solved many national problems, like the Great Depression, and Global problems, like World War II. Overall I learned a lot from this book, and I'm really happy that I sat down to read it this summer!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)